#16320: Handle finite slices for infinite enumerate sets
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: tscrim | Owner: sage-combinat
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-7.1
Component: categories | Resolution:
Keywords: infinite | Merged in:
enumerated set slices | Reviewers: Nathann Cohen
Authors: Travis Scrimshaw | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 1dbb053cfb3f6261d30aac6d20a300bfd57a45e6
public/infinite_enum_set_slices-16320| Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by tscrim):
* status: needs_review => needs_work
Comment:
This breaks several doctests, some of which indicate things we definitely
should support, specifically negative indices. Probably should try
`self.list()[i]` first in `__getitem__` for enumerated sets and for finite
enumerated sets, we should do `self.list()[i]` if `i < 0`.
We probably should also rewrite the iterator and listing methods for
(finite?) enumerated sets to use a lazy list, but I think that is best on
a follow-up.
For an `iterator` method, I would call it `iterator_range` for
consistency, but I'm not opposed to it. Moreover, the logic from
`unrank_range` could probably all be moved there and `unrank_range` just
returns a list constructed from `iterator_range`.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16320#comment:32>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
